THE GOVERNMENT is adopting inter-agency procedures aimed at strengthening implementment against offshore gaming operations and stopping their reemergence, Malacañang said.
The usual operating procedures (SOP), signed at a ceremony in Malacañang on Wednesday, consolidate enforcement under Executive Order No. 74, issued in 2024, and Republic Act No. 12312, also generally known as the POGO Ban Act, and integrate multiple laws and agency rules right into a single framework.
The SOPs establish a coordinated process covering intelligence gathering, enforcement operations, evidence handling, prosecution, and asset preservation in cases involving illegal Philippine offshore gaming operators (POGOs) and related activities, Malacañang said in a press release.
Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto said the procedures are supposed to strengthen coordination and enforcement, describing them as “one other vital step” in the federal government’s campaign against illegal offshore gaming operations.
“These SOPs weren’t drawn from thin air. They were borne of hard-earned lessons from the sphere,” he said in a speech through the signing ceremony, adding that they establish “end-to-end procedures” and equip the federal government with stronger legal tools.
He said authorities are looking for to deal with the adaptability of illegal operations, noting that such groups are “able to reappearing under latest names, latest fronts, and latest methods every time they’re struck.”
The Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission will serve because the lead coordinating body under the framework, while the Department of Justice will deploy prosecutors early in case buildup to strengthen evidence and improve conviction rates.
Other agencies involved include the Anti-Money Laundering Council and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which can handle financial tracking and company intelligence.
The SOPs also cover the management and maintenance of assets seized from illegal operations.
Mr. Recto said the approach goes beyond closing down operations, shifting toward “preserving assets, seizing illicit resources, securing convictions, protecting victims, and cutting these criminal enterprises off from the financial and company networks that sustain them.”
Offshore gaming firms expanded within the Philippines starting in 2016, catering largely to foreign clients and contributing to government revenues and demand for office space and services.
Authorities, nevertheless, have linked segments of the industry to crimes resembling human trafficking, money laundering, and cyber-related offenses, prompting tighter regulation and enforcement actions lately.
President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. announced a ban on POGOs in his 2024 State of the Nation Address, citing the social costs related to the industry.
Mr. Recto said the policy was driven by concerns that revenues couldn’t outweigh its impact, saying it was “a call rooted not in convenience, but in conscience; not in expediency, but in duty.”
The shutdown of offshore gaming operations displaced hundreds of staff. Estimates ranged from 23,000 to 42,000 Filipino employees, based on the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp., while the Department of Labor and Employment identified about 30,567 affected staff as of November 2024.
“Public distrust of POGOs and concerns over illicit activities justified dismantling the sector,” Hansley A. Juliano, a political science lecturer on the Ateneo de Manila University, said via Messenger, adding that doubts persevered over whether revenues from the industry benefited the broader public.
He said any fiscal gains appeared limited, with “more tangible improvements seen in reduced housing pressure and concrete congestion,” while broader indicators resembling tax compliance and investor confidence remain tied to larger economic forces.
“Tax compliance, investor confidence and externalities, while nominally related, cater to greater macroeconomic trends and investment areas beyond those previously occupied by POGOs,” he added.
Mr. Juliano said sustaining the policy direction would rely on institutional safeguards and consistent enforcement, noting the necessity for “stronger irreversible checks” to stop policy reversals. — Chloe Mari A. Hufana